What makes a classroom education elite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transplant to DC from Western Europe with kids in middle school. I am trying to learn more about college/university life in the US since it is so different from back home.

There is a lot of discussion on this forum about elite schools and the various opportunities they offer outside the classroom, especially professionally. But what I am trying to understand, since I’ll be paying for an education, is what is it about the classroom experience at these schools that provides kids with an elite education? If economics, for example, is taught from the same textbook at Princeton vs Penn State, what makes the Princeton classroom experience elite?

In answer to your specific question highlighted above, it is the caliber of students and the expectations of the professors that differentiate the classroom experiences among colleges and universities.

For caliber of students, the US News college/university rankings is an excellent resource.

Nevertheless, an intelligent, motivated, hard-working student can get a solid education at hundreds of colleges and universities in the USA. But, just like athletics, one typically maximizes his/her potential by competing with/working alongside the best students.

Among universities, many public (state supported) universities offer honors colleges and honors classes to the top incoming students. Elite private universities often offer small class sizes full of talented students who are hard-working achievers.

This isn’t true. Athletes maximize their potential by attending the best program where they will be a starter. Sitting on the bench for four years at an overcrowded elite program isn’t all that helpful for anyone, in athletics or academics.

There is no analogue for sitting on a bench when it comes to attending an college. Everyone accepted can participate, make friends, build valuable connections, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transplant to DC from Western Europe with kids in middle school. I am trying to learn more about college/university life in the US since it is so different from back home.

There is a lot of discussion on this forum about elite schools and the various opportunities they offer outside the classroom, especially professionally. But what I am trying to understand, since I’ll be paying for an education, is what is it about the classroom experience at these schools that provides kids with an elite education? If economics, for example, is taught from the same textbook at Princeton vs Penn State, what makes the Princeton classroom experience elite?

It's the peers and the faculty. Real example: DC at an ivy, best friend from high school at a LAC between 20 and 30. Course was a humanities course with a different name, used the same text. Both courses had 12-18 students. LAC course discussed the text readings throughout the semester, covered almost all of the textbook, wrote 3 papers, had great discussions. DC's professor assigned readings such that they finished the entire textbook in the first 6 weeks, spent the rest of the time reading and analyzing primary sources comparing and contrasting the points in the text and reasoning through the details. The depth of discussion was deeper. Papers required were over double the length required at the LAC, the reading per week expected was triple that of the LAC.
For stem: compare and contrast syllabi, p-sets and exams from multivariable calc or organic chem at a regular college vs an elite: it is night and day as far as the pace, depth, breadth and complexity covered. Knowing a professor who has taught at both is helpful. We have an ivy professor in the family. Their insight into students and expectations across different schools (their phd, post docs, guest lecturer and now tenure spot were different places).

A textbook? Or a book book?

Same question here from a history/poli sci major at HYPSM. I don't recall any textbooks. A typical class would have up to 12 books.

+1

That was my experience as well. And, of course, you had the required reading of 12 books plus the additional recommended reading of 20+ books

Yes! Memories! I never touched the recommended readings, and I always wondering if anyone else did. I also learned the open secret that you didn't even need to read all of the "required" reading either. And that learning what to read and what you could skim/skip was a useful and necessary skill. But I digress.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: If economics, for example, is taught from the same textbook at Princeton vs Penn State, what makes the Princeton classroom experience elite?

The difference might be the prof at Princeton wrote the textbook they are teaching from. The Penn state is using the textbook written by Princeton prof.

This was my experience—and when you engage with the prof, you get much more nuance and the backstory of what wasn’t included.

In addition, the access to the networks or lab research or studies that professor does. It’s not unusual for a professor to take on one or two undergrads in their labs. And then a rec like that for grad school would open other doors. This was my son’s experience.

This is silly. First of all, writing the book and forcing kids to pay for it doesn't make it a good book. Second, it's exceedingly rare for the authors of the top books to be teaching that book's class. The best books were written a long time ago. Third, if the book is so bad that the professor needs to supplement their own book, then writing the book is not a sign that the class is good! Fourth, a professor who did NOT write the book gives the class the benefit of an alternative perspective on the material.

It wasn't rare at all. I guess you didn't have this experience. Grateful that I did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oftentimes, you can access course syllabus’s online. Try to find a similar course, like intro micro or macro, and compare course pace, material studied, and course requirements. Generally, the better schools will cover more material overall and more primary material, and require more papers. This reflects the caliber of the students, who can move through the material quickly, unpack material themselves, and make sophisticated written arguments about the material.

Small classes encourage more participation and direct professor involvement. Professors (not graduate students) teach and provide context and sophisticated insights into the material, and sometimes invite esteemed individuals to discuss class-relevant material.

Overall - both faculty and students - are working at a higher level and faster pace because they’re smart, motivated, curious, and want to make a difference in the world.

People at the best schools are not interested in just making a living/money in an ordinary career/job; they want to work on bigger issues on a bigger stage to make a difference in the world. So, another part of the difference is the overall motivation and attitude of everyone on campus, which will impact your student because students tend to look to faculty and peers, among others, for role models.

Is that why so many of them go into consulting and high finance?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transplant to DC from Western Europe with kids in middle school. I am trying to learn more about college/university life in the US since it is so different from back home.

There is a lot of discussion on this forum about elite schools and the various opportunities they offer outside the classroom, especially professionally. But what I am trying to understand, since I’ll be paying for an education, is what is it about the classroom experience at these schools that provides kids with an elite education? If economics, for example, is taught from the same textbook at Princeton vs Penn State, what makes the Princeton classroom experience elite?

At top schools, the peer group is superior, allowing for professors to go deeper and more commonly assign papers for reading rather than textbook excerpts. The homeworks tend to be unique and instructive rather than repetitive. They are also more accepting of students taking advanced courses early even if they don't formally meet the prerequisites. For example, here is a student who took econ 301 without any prior econ experience, despite econ 100 being an on-paper prerequisite: https://www.reddit.com/r/princeton/comments/15wng5o/how_rough_will_eco_310_be_without_any_micro/

Let me explain what it is like to take a college course at a "lesser" school. Like mine. You will pay for/be assigned at least 500-2,000 pages of reading. If you are smart and it is interesting, you will read and reflect upon it. What you learn is up to you, because you are doing the reading. If you like the material, you can read and write more about it. If you absolutely love it, you can do 4x more work on your papers than anyone in the class. You can go to office hours. If your teacher socializes with students you can go to bar night and talk even more about the subject. There is absolutely nothing precluding you from going deeper on the subject. Just like you will do when you get out of college and no longer have an academic genius to force feed assignments to you.

Perhaps it might even be relaxing not to be assigned a bazillion readings. I did nearly all the assigned reading for every course in college. I'm a fast and accurate reader who got a 780 on the SAT Verbal. My 2,000 page estimate above was scholarly articles for Japanese Economics. And I'm known for having a very good memory. However, years after college, I only remember some of what I learned about...mainly what I liked the best, the works that resonated with me, and some critical "aha" moments. I agree with those who say we go to college to "learn to learn" and to become more cultured. The sheer amount of reading really doesn't matter past a certain point.

And I find that article about how Harvard students aren't reading anymore pretty funny. The winds of cultural change are blowing...

Also, at my "lesser" school, I remember having class with at least four authors. One wrote a book selected as a notable work of the year by Phi Beta Kappa. One wrote a science textbook that was actually intentionally funny - the only joky textbook I've seen that actually made me laugh. Another prepared a translation of medieval French poetry. And the fourth had been an archeologist at the Duomo in Florence and wrote a marvelous architecture book about the city my university was located in.

I do not feel sorry about missing out on the likes of large auditorium classes with Larry Summers. At least my flagship large auditorium professors never implied that women had inferior intellects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oftentimes, you can access course syllabus’s online. Try to find a similar course, like intro micro or macro, and compare course pace, material studied, and course requirements. Generally, the better schools will cover more material overall and more primary material, and require more papers. This reflects the caliber of the students, who can move through the material quickly, unpack material themselves, and make sophisticated written arguments about the material.

Small classes encourage more participation and direct professor involvement. Professors (not graduate students) teach and provide context and sophisticated insights into the material, and sometimes invite esteemed individuals to discuss class-relevant material.

Overall - both faculty and students - are working at a higher level and faster pace because they’re smart, motivated, curious, and want to make a difference in the world.

People at the best schools are not interested in just making a living/money in an ordinary career/job; they want to work on bigger issues on a bigger stage to make a difference in the world. So, another part of the difference is the overall motivation and attitude of everyone on campus, which will impact your student because students tend to look to faculty and peers, among others, for role models.

Is that why so many of them go into consulting and high finance?

Yes, because both paths provide great training for starting your own thing, going into government, jumping into senior leadership in industry, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transplant to DC from Western Europe with kids in middle school. I am trying to learn more about college/university life in the US since it is so different from back home.

There is a lot of discussion on this forum about elite schools and the various opportunities they offer outside the classroom, especially professionally. But what I am trying to understand, since I’ll be paying for an education, is what is it about the classroom experience at these schools that provides kids with an elite education? If economics, for example, is taught from the same textbook at Princeton vs Penn State, what makes the Princeton classroom experience elite?

It's the peers and the faculty. Real example: DC at an ivy, best friend from high school at a LAC between 20 and 30. Course was a humanities course with a different name, used the same text. Both courses had 12-18 students. LAC course discussed the text readings throughout the semester, covered almost all of the textbook, wrote 3 papers, had great discussions. DC's professor assigned readings such that they finished the entire textbook in the first 6 weeks, spent the rest of the time reading and analyzing primary sources comparing and contrasting the points in the text and reasoning through the details. The depth of discussion was deeper. Papers required were over double the length required at the LAC, the reading per week expected was triple that of the LAC.
For stem: compare and contrast syllabi, p-sets and exams from multivariable calc or organic chem at a regular college vs an elite: it is night and day as far as the pace, depth, breadth and complexity covered. Knowing a professor who has taught at both is helpful. We have an ivy professor in the family. Their insight into students and expectations across different schools (their phd, post docs, guest lecturer and now tenure spot were different places).

A textbook? Or a book book?

Same question here from a history/poli sci major at HYPSM. I don't recall any textbooks. A typical class would have up to 12 books.

+1

That was my experience as well. And, of course, you had the required reading of 12 books plus the additional recommended reading of 20+ books

Yes! Memories! I never touched the recommended readings, and I always wondering if anyone else did. I also learned the open secret that you didn't even need to read all of the "required" reading either. And that learning what to read and what you could skim/skip was a useful and necessary skill. But I digress.

I read all the readings at my LAC. Lots of reading, but not an unreasonable amount. No need to skim/skip until grad school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Transplant to DC from Western Europe with kids in middle school. I am trying to learn more about college/university life in the US since it is so different from back home.

There is a lot of discussion on this forum about elite schools and the various opportunities they offer outside the classroom, especially professionally. But what I am trying to understand, since I’ll be paying for an education, is what is it about the classroom experience at these schools that provides kids with an elite education? If economics, for example, is taught from the same textbook at Princeton vs Penn State, what makes the Princeton classroom experience elite?

It's the peers and the faculty. Real example: DC at an ivy, best friend from high school at a LAC between 20 and 30. Course was a humanities course with a different name, used the same text. Both courses had 12-18 students. LAC course discussed the text readings throughout the semester, covered almost all of the textbook, wrote 3 papers, had great discussions. DC's professor assigned readings such that they finished the entire textbook in the first 6 weeks, spent the rest of the time reading and analyzing primary sources comparing and contrasting the points in the text and reasoning through the details. The depth of discussion was deeper. Papers required were over double the length required at the LAC, the reading per week expected was triple that of the LAC.
For stem: compare and contrast syllabi, p-sets and exams from multivariable calc or organic chem at a regular college vs an elite: it is night and day as far as the pace, depth, breadth and complexity covered. Knowing a professor who has taught at both is helpful. We have an ivy professor in the family. Their insight into students and expectations across different schools (their phd, post docs, guest lecturer and now tenure spot were different places).

A textbook? Or a book book?

Same question here from a history/poli sci major at HYPSM. I don't recall any textbooks. A typical class would have up to 12 books.

+1

That was my experience as well. And, of course, you had the required reading of 12 books plus the additional recommended reading of 20+ books

Yes! Memories! I never touched the recommended readings, and I always wondering if anyone else did. I also learned the open secret that you didn't even need to read all of the "required" reading either. And that learning what to read and what you could skim/skip was a useful and necessary skill. But I digress.

I read all the readings at my LAC. Lots of reading, but not an unreasonable amount. No need to skim/skip until grad school.

And honestly, then it was skimming, not skipping. What's elite about an education where faking your way through is the norm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oftentimes, you can access course syllabus’s online. Try to find a similar course, like intro micro or macro, and compare course pace, material studied, and course requirements. Generally, the better schools will cover more material overall and more primary material, and require more papers. This reflects the caliber of the students, who can move through the material quickly, unpack material themselves, and make sophisticated written arguments about the material.

Small classes encourage more participation and direct professor involvement. Professors (not graduate students) teach and provide context and sophisticated insights into the material, and sometimes invite esteemed individuals to discuss class-relevant material.

Overall - both faculty and students - are working at a higher level and faster pace because they’re smart, motivated, curious, and want to make a difference in the world.

People at the best schools are not interested in just making a living/money in an ordinary career/job; they want to work on bigger issues on a bigger stage to make a difference in the world. So, another part of the difference is the overall motivation and attitude of everyone on campus, which will impact your student because students tend to look to faculty and peers, among others, for role models.

Is that why so many of them go into consulting and high finance?

Yes, because both paths provide great training for starting your own thing, going into government, jumping into senior leadership in industry, etc.

+1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_former_employees_of_McKinsey_%26_Company